Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
A Study in Sherlock (with SPOILERS) - the stories (and celebrating Sir Arthur Conan Doyle)
Warner Bros. has already announced a third installment in their Sherlock Holmes series and the first draft is being produced with screenwriter Drew Pearce writing the script. Presumably, the film will be coming in 2014, not much else is known if Robert Downey Jr. will be returning to portray the character of Holmes or not.
http://www.deadline.com/2011/10/warner-bros-ready-for-sherlock-holmes-3/
http://www.deadline.com/2011/10/warner-bros-ready-for-sherlock-holmes-3/
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Although I don´t really catch on to the first two films. I find them a bit bloated.
novels are quite different but good. The movies are good too. The novels portray (in my opinion) Sherlock as less charismatic than how Robert Downey Plays him. http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/sherlockholmes110914000424.jpg
:O WHAT?! :-O @Dimi you need to get a Conan Doyle collection of Holmes short stories and get reading. You are missing out on such a brilliant body of work. Also watch some Jeremy Brett and the Sherlock BBC series. The best part of watching all the Sherlock Holmes adaptions is that they sneak in little details from the short stories that fans smirk at, while nobody else knows what they are raving about. I highly recommend the short stories and novels to everyone.
So much to do, so little time. ;-) But thanks for the advice, friend. :)
No problem. I know what you mean. I have a stack of books encompassing several Fleming Bond novels, John Le Carré Smiley novels, and two classics from Edgar Rice Burroughs I have stacked and collecting dust.
I agree they can exist together but on the strength of Sherlock Series 1 & 2 for me I'm not really bothered with another film, whereas a 3rd series of Cumberbatch & Freeman is something I eagerly await.
I would worry more about the idea by some American broadcaster to update SH and put him in a modern New York.
I'm sorry, but those reasons are just why Rathbone pails in comparison to Brett. No Sherlock actor taking on the character should appear like they are "not a total stranger to the ladies". Holmes simply didn't do that. He could appreciate women of course, but never understood the nonsensical practice of love. He thought love got in the way of his expansive methods of deduction, clouding his mind and halting his unattached actions. He was more interested in people or women who could match him, who posed a challenge, a-la Irene Adler. Neither should he be such an action man. All things considered, Holmes was a great bare knuckle boxer, and formidable in baritsu(the whole reason he is able to beat Moriarty nonetheless), but he shouldn't be the crazy action man that RDJ's Sherlock is being, though I love the new interpretation. Some aspects of the RDJ Holmes is just not what I want in a Sherlock interpretation. The RDJ Holmes acts too crazed and somewhat inane at times than I've seen him in recent times. The love interest with Irene, the explosions and all the loaded on action are a little too much for a truly Sherlockian interpretation. But, by far I love RDJ and his take on Sherlock. The fighting is a great addition, and the films actually use baritsu in the fight scenes. I appreciate that as a huge fan, and the way Moriarty and Sherlock are set up in a mental chess game in Sherlock Homes 2 was brilliant to watch, both characters acted so well off each other. The 2nd was supreme, with great moments full of Sherlock punch. Can't wait for RDJ's 3rd. But Watson, in affect, is just as crucial as Sherlock in the great partnership. Getting back to the Rathbone interpretation, I see a weak point in the Watson side of the duo. The relationship is founded on the fact that Sherlock is all about brains over brawn, where Watson was the brawn so to speak. But in the Rathbone Holmes Watson was a dolt, a complete laughing stock. I don't appreciate that. Watson is by far no idiot, but an intellectual and formidable mental match with his knowledge of his physician profession to Holmes and his knowledge of botany, chemistry, London crime and all his other vast mental faculties. Watson has seen terrible things from his tour in Afghanistan before A Study in Scarlet, and the Watson of the Rathbone Holmes is a Watson who seems to have never been there in the action because the character of Watson was treated so much like a comedy show. In the RDJ Holmes Watson is brilliant, and even in early Brett we seen David Burke's Watson use deduction he learned from watching Holmes, much like Jude Law's Watson. Martin Freeman from Sherlock is another strong contender in this area, where we again see a Watson using his vast medical knowledge to aid Sherlock in the things he isn't as brushed up on simply because he finds no interest in the anatomy of the human body or what have you. All in all upon reflection, the Rathbone Holmes just isn't as good to me when taking everything into consideration. The closest thing to Brett thus far in my opinion is Benedict Cumberbatch's modern interpretation. His Holmes is spot on, and he knows all the movements of Holmes down to holding his hands together full length when in deep thought. I can't wait to see more from his, because he does such justice to the character, and in his Holmes we see a slightly caring side that is more apparent there than in past interpretations alongside Martin's Watson. The two have brilliant chemistry, and the second series of BBC's Sherlock showed us just that in a very strong, emotional fashion. In closing, Brett is the utter epitome of the character that is Sherlock Holmes. In Brett, we see a theatre like presence, a real strong portrayal. He has all the Holmes mannerisms down to a tee, and when we see him solving his cases, we think that Brett really IS Holmes. We see Brett himself thinking deeply like Holmes, right on the screen. He just had a way of making every action, every word as the character a masterpiece of acting, and that is why he is undoubtedly and so very deservedly, the unequivocal best.
Are you saying that Moffat & Gattis should stop so these lacklustre hollywood films can continue?
If any stops it should be the films, the series leave them looking shallow and dumb!
Both can exist I'm just not interested in seeing RDJ or Law when Cumberbatch & Freeman own the parts so much better.
Cant really argue with that.
Or that. Excellent posts Sirs.
If the next series of Sherlock is as good as the last then EON have to finally fire those two clowns and give Moffat and Gattis a crack at Bond.
I would agree quite strongly with everything said above. The one thing that the RDJ films did well was cast Jude Law as Watson. He's actually the Watson who I find the most true to the books - handsome, a man of action, gets irritated at Holmes and isn't afraid to say so, and a man possessing his own intelligence.
The first RDJ film really had nothing at all to do with Sherlock Holmes other than character names, basic setup, and location/time period. It was an entertaining movie but as someone who has read all of the Sherlock Holmes stories (the short stories are a great starting place as many are only about 20 pages long) I was really surprised at how unrecognizable it was as "Holmesian". Still, there's room for many different interpretations. I agree with many fans that the Jeremy Brett series is "definitive" but I also rate Moffat's Sherlock as a quite honestly brilliant updating of the character - although set in the modern day many of the aspects of the Holmes stories are faithfully represented (and others tweaked in interesting ways, such as a "three patch problem").
I had never thought of Moffat working on Bond but as soon as someone mentioned it here a while back I thought it a very interesting idea. Pretty much everything the guy has done has turned to gold and he's shown himself adept at everything from 1930's screwball style reparte (Press Gang) to dirty humour (Coupling) to exquisitely complex sci-fi (Doctor Who).
He puts his neck out to save Irene.
He drops a CIA agent who hurt Mrs. Hudson out the window.
In the Baskerville episode, when he says to John "I don't have friends. I just have one", my heart leaps out of my chest with happiness.
He comes to tears when calling John from the hospital when his death seems inevitable.
They are all from the super-duper-spectacular second series. Sorry. :)
P.S. You need to see them, and we must talk!